McCarthy has one option

[boston bean]

Go with a plurality vote and let the idiots make Hakeem Jeffries Speaker.

They would never do it. So, McCarthy would win.

Put us all out of our fucking misery please.

[Irish_Dem]

1. It could be just the beginning of our misery if the anarchists continue their attack

on the US government.

[Renew Deal]

2. Take a break

You don't have to watch

[boston bean]

3. You don't have to read or reply to my posts. I shall not take a break.

[Renew Deal]

4. OK, so don't take a break.

You don't have to subject yourself to "misery." You choose to.

[boston bean]

5. Is something happening whether I watch or not.

Does it mean anything whether I watch or not. You sure do make a ludicrous assumption and request.

[Renew Deal]

6. Are you subjected to the misery of speaker votes telepathically?

Or is it causing suffering due to its simple existence?

[boston bean]

12. I am subjected to this dysfunction that is in fact happening.

This craziness. This bullshit. Republicans do impact me. No matter if I am watching the tv or not.

[LonePirate]

7. Some GOP members will be missing votes dropping the number needed to win to 217 then 216.

If we can get 8 more of them to bail, Jeffries would become Speaker without a single Republican vote. I don’t think that will intentionally happen but who knows once the numbers get that small and people want to put an end to this circus.

[underpants]

9. That's what I'm hoping for. Not expecting but it wouldn't surprise me if it happened

This has been stated a lot of the last few days but they do not have any knowledge of how to govern. Their whole schtick is to make noise on some sort of media and it’s all poo flinging.

[Emile]

8. Nonsensical idea because no one can change house rules

until the house selects a speaker and everyone is sworn in.

[ColinC]

10. That was my question which you answered

Thanks!

[boston bean]

13. Wrong

Is there any way to elect a speaker without a majority?

In short, yes. The chamber has extremely wide latitude in determining how it wants to elect the speaker, as long as a majority of members-elect approves such a move.

The House opted in both 1849 and 1855 to adopt the use of plurality voting to decide the speakership. They structured the election to first allow for three standard votes. Then, if no one succeeded in attaining a majority, a fourth one to be decisive at a plurality threshold.

Given the divided House and the need for a majority to support it, the likelihood of this seems pretty small. But the option does exist.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/04/house-mccarthy-speakership-republican-00076306

[Emile]

14. Hell I never knew that.

[Stinky The Clown]

16. Thanks for posting what should be common knowledge around here

Just need five GOOPers to vote with a solid Dem caucus and we get Speaker Jeffries and a historic event.

I think that is still a long shot, but getting a little less long with each passing vote.

[C_U_L8R]

11. Jeffries has led 10 out of 10 votes

That's enough majority for me. Time to go with the winning team.

[AngryOldDem]

15. CSPAN quoting tweets that say a deal is near.

Not quite enough to put Kev over the top yet, but apparently the one-vote-to-oust-the-speaker bullshit is in play, so Kev is fucked no matter how this plays out.

This is such an embarassing joke.

[Johonny]

17. I assume he will keep forcing votes until he wins

He wants to be speaker and will let conservative apparatus on social media and FOX news beat these people into submission. I think it is safe to assume, he doesn't think these idiots are dumb enough to let Jeffries win.

We think they're dumb enough, however.

[Kennah]

18. I want Kevin to break the 133 record. I want him to the king, of losers.